Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
And to complicate matters further the max antenna height being talked
about being around 3-4 wavelengths off the ground is going to break the radiation pattern up into a number of lobes at various vertical angles. For that reason alone I think it is still worth modelling. There will be specific heights where the horizontal radiated component is at a maximum and this is likely the most desirable. It will also give a good indication of what takeoff angles will be like for ionospheric propagation modes. You'd also see the spacing/height effect on undesirable straight upwards radiation. Then again a crank up/down tower and maybe inter element spacing adjustment mght be a good empirical way to get the right data as well. Bob VK2YQA wrote: Real simple. He's so close to the ground he has a lot of high angle gain. As he goes up that will go down and the low angle gain will improve. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
Cold Water Pipe Ground? | Antenna | |||
The Apollo Hoax FAQ | General | |||
Grounding Rod | Shortwave | |||
QST Article: An Easy to Build, Dual-Band Collinear Antenna | Antenna |